[yo2tup2]

You don't need to buy the cables to demo them. I've demo'd a quite a few without having to purchase them. But I do agree my question was a tangent from the topic... that's why I stated that the question was for my own curiosity. My apologies!

 

[meat01]

Quote:

Something I always found interesting while reading feedback regarding the more expensive cables on forums... I never read of anyone that has tried any of the more expensive cables (ie Virtual Dynamics cables, PAD, JPS Aluminta, and other $1000+ cables) say that they've tried them and didn't hear any differences whatsoever. There are plenty of feedback were people say they've tried these cables but hated the way they sounded, so they went to different cables (sometimes much less expensive cables)....but I've never read of anyone say they tried them and didn't hear any differences at all. i'm curious....for the "non-believers" and people that say don't hear a difference between cables.... what cables have you tried and compared? or are your conclusions based purely on the lack of measurements that show differences? this question is just for my curiosity, not for debate purposes

What does this have to do with scientific aspects of cable sound?

 

[dvw]

I got a simple idea for a simple experiment and it's does not involve any money at all.

It is a well known fact that heat changes the electrical characteristic of material and electronic component including cables.

So you just take your cable and wrap it with a heating pad and then listen and see if it changes the sound. You can take all the time you want, use your own equipment and pick your own track.

If it does change then the sound perception is measureable, if it does not change then the conclusion might be that the difference is caused by something other than Physics.

 

[yo2tup2]

Quote:

Originally Posted by meat01 /img/forum/go_quote.gif What does this have to do with scientific aspects of cable sound?

see my previous post.

 

[Patrick82]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dvw /img/forum/go_quote.gif I got a simple idea for a simple experiment and it's does not involve any money at all. It is a well known fact that heat changes the electrical characteristic of material and electronic component including cables. So you just take your cable and wrap it with a heating pad and then listen and see if it changes the sound. You can take all the time you want, use your own equipment and pick your own track. If it does change then the sound perception is measureable, if it does not change then the conclusion might be that the difference is caused by something other than Physics.

I already found that by accident. My Valhalla cables had more detail in a colder room. In a warm room it sounds smoother.

 

[voxr3m]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patrick82 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I already found that by accident. My Valhalla cables had more detail in a colder room. In a warm room it sounds smoother.

That could be attributed to the density of air in the room, with the speed of sound slower in colder air than it is in warmer air. I'd also imagine high frequency response being better in denser air and lower frequencies coming out more in less dense air.

The challenge now comes to how the difference in sound could be attributed to a physical changeint he cables...

 

[Sovkiller]

Guys don't forget also the Psycho-acoustic and the placebo effects, they are also real, and valid, and proved by the science that exist...so if you believe that you hear something you will hear it, regardless of if it is true, or measurable or not, if you like one cable you are more prone to like its sound...

That is why some skeptics created the DBT's, and in those, good, bad, reliable or not, well done or poorly implemented, the results are always more or less typical, completely ambiguous...

Personally I prefer to invest in other parts of the system that will be a lot more rewarding, better amps, better headphones, better recordings, better sources....cables are IMO important, but the last thing to worry about in one system once you get a decent ones....

 

[bellsprout]

Quote:

Originally Posted by voxr3m /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just a reminder, RLC characteristics are important transmission line measurements (you sure aren't going to measure 75 ohms across a cable with an ohmmeter). The question is, are audio interconnects considered 'transmission lines' in the EM sense? I'll quote Bill Whitlock in his transmission line article (that you can find on google pretty easily) since he does a very good job of setting up what a transmission line is http://digitalcontentproducer.com/ma...ion_lines_why/ The second definition is what is important to us. Is an audio cable a transmission line in that sense? For that purpose, I'll point you to another very well written (read easy to understand) article on transmission line effects and why they exist: http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_2/chpt_14/1.html Transmission line effects arise from the fact that signals propagate through a line at close to the speed of light. For short lines, this is for all intents and purpose, instantaneous. For longer lines, a wave does not propagate to the end instantaneously. As electrons start to 'move,' you get an electric field forming between the two conductors due to an imbalance of charge. This contributes to the capacitance of a line. Once current starts to flow, you get the formation of a magnetic field and hence your line has inductance. What you get is kind of like the phenomenon you get at a stop light turned green where not all the cars move at once and you have a delay between when the first car starts moving and when the last car finally gets going. The key points to glean from the last link (if you read through all the succesive chapters) is that in order for transmission line effects to become significant, the wavelength of signal you are transmitting is typically on the order of 10% the total length of the line you are transmitting it through. What does this mean? A signal at 10-20kHz would have to travel on a line that is miles long in order for effects to become significant (keep in mind the speed of light, and the distance of the cable.) Now what about a coaxial cable? They're so short. What's up with that? In this case, coaxial cables typically handle video signals comprised of frequencies in the millions of hertz. This means the wavelength of a signal at that frequency is significantly smaller than that of a signal in the audio frequency range and the cable does not have be as long in order for wave propagation times to become significant. The question is, are these differences significant enough to hear at audio frequencies? edit: The same reasoning applies to power cables. Assuming a cable is well shielded, transmission line effects should be negligible as well. You've got an incredibly short cable carrying what is a very low frequency (60 hertz) signal. Resistance is almost zero for a cable run of that length and ample conductor gauge. What else can a high end power cable improve on?

good post

i'm not too sure about audio cables not being transmission lines though. can u explain why frequency is important? my understanding is that the characteristic impedance, based on the capacitance and inductance per unit length is not dependent on frequency.

i get the gist of the whole argument tho - there are so many capacitive effects elsewhere in the circuit that the capacitance of a cable in the order of picofarads becomes pretty negligible, but i coulda told u that

 

[Patrick82]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sovkiller /img/forum/go_quote.gif Guys don't forget also the Psycho-acoustic and the placebo effects, they are also real, and valid, and proved by the science that exist...so if you believe that you hear something you will hear it, regardless of if it is true, or measurable or not, if you like one cable you are more prone to like its sound.

I don't believe in love at first sight, I believe in love at first listen. It doesn't matter how the cable looks like as long as it sounds good.

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by voxr3m /img/forum/go_quote.gif That could be attributed to the density of air in the room, with the speed of sound slower in colder air than it is in warmer air. I'd also imagine high frequency response being better in denser air and lower frequencies coming out more in less dense air.

I think it's due to the density of the air between the ears. Warmth might make it expand and create higher pressures.

See ya
Steve

 

[dvw]

Actually, there's a second part to the experiment. If you find the difference in the hearing, now with a third party's help. Try to listen to the sound and see if you can tell if the cable is heated. For Patrick, he can probably tell what the room temperature is by listening to his music.

For the record, an IBM type 2 shielded cable, the resistance is maximum about 28 ohm per Km and C = max 1000 pF per Km. Cat 5 cable is about the same but per 305 m (EIA568 specification). So in order to make a difference, your interconnect will have to be very long.

As for transmission line effect, the wavelength of the audio signal is too long to have an effect.

 

[voxr3m]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bellsprout /img/forum/go_quote.gif good post i'm not too sure about audio cables not being transmission lines though. can u explain why frequency is important? my understanding is that the characteristic impedance, based on the capacitance and inductance per unit length is not dependent on frequency. i get the gist of the whole argument tho - there are so many capacitive effects elsewhere in the circuit that the capacitance of a cable in the order of picofarads becomes pretty negligible, but i coulda told u that

Page 5 of the second link it what you want to read.

http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_2/chpt_14/5.html

That basically sums up why the effects are largely frequency dependent.

You're right about the characteristic impedance of a line not depending on the signal frequency. It depends on the cable characteristics alone, namely the square root of L/C. The velocity of wave propagation is dependent on the permittivity and permeability of the dielectric. The properties of the dielectric are also what help to determine the inductance and capacitance for a line.

 

[tin ears]

Good discussion on cables, but what about the RCA/xlr connectors?

Isn't the connection the weakest link, regardless of what type of cable being used?

Wouldn't a hardwired/soldered connection be the best solution either by hardwiring components together or by building one component that has both the source and the amp and then hardwiring that directly to the speaker's crossover?

Do you cable nonbelievers feel the above might, at least, be true?

Sovkiller has a good point, but what if we were already dealing with the world's best audio components and had no other place to turn in the quest for better sound?

Or, let's say you were the world's best builder and designer of audio equipment and you were going to design and build the best system in the world and didn't care if you sold it or not. Would you build it in one box with all connections between source and amp hardwired with as short a connection as possible, or would you build seperate boxes and use cables with connectors?

The recent Stereophile review of the $16,000 Krell integrated amp got me started with all this. Apparently, krell has come up with an entirely new way to connect Krell components called the CAST system. The reviewer felt it sounded better than both the balanced and single ended outputs. I wondered after reading this, why Krell didn't just build their cd player into the integrated amp and eliminate the connection all together. The most obvious answer to me at least, is that people probably wouldn't buy it, because it brings back the old idea of the low fi, one box solutions.

I guess I am taking the long way around saying that I think companies like Krell, Bel Canto, Cary, VTL, Sim, Classe, Audio research, Macintosh,Ayre etc, etc all ready make great sources and amps. Why not start putting them together in one box and eliminate the cable fuss and cable expense? The second tier players are starting to do it. The only reason I can see to run seperate boxes is if you believe in the potential for monoblocks, up close to the speakers.

 

[bellsprout]

Quote:

Originally Posted by voxr3m /img/forum/go_quote.gif Page 5 of the second link it what you want to read. http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_2/chpt_14/5.html That basically sums up why the effects are largely frequency dependent. You're right about the characteristic impedance of a line not depending on the signal frequency. It depends on the cable characteristics alone, namely the square root of L/C. The velocity of wave propagation is dependent on the permittivity and permeability of the dielectric. The properties of the dielectric are also what help to determine the inductance and capacitance for a line.

I see. Impedance increases from the end to the beginning of the line, and it becomes noticable when the length of the wire is many wavelengths long. The biggest impedance is still the impedance at the load right?

 

[markl]

Quote:

Good discussion on cables, but what about the RCA/xlr connectors?

I think this is a critical point that skeptics need to be willing to explore.

Do you skeptics accept that there are differences in sound between single-ended and balanced cables? If a wire is a wire is a wire, how can a slightly different configuration like going balanced make a difference? If that specific change in wire configuration makes a diffference, then why do other changes (like going from copper to silver, different winding configurations, different guages, different quality RCA connectors, etc.) make no difference?

How do you square that circle? Seems to me to be consistent you have to deny differences between balanced and unbalanced cables, too. Do you?